must be, a mastery of the language he translates out of, and that he translates into; but if a defi cience be to be allowed in either, it is in the original; since if he be but master enough of the tongue of his author, as to be master of his sense, it is possible for him to express that sense with eloquence in his own, if he have a thorough command of that. But without the latter, he can never arrive at the useful and the delightful; without which reading is a penance and fatigue. It is true that there will be a great many beauties, which in every tongue depend on the diction, that will be lost in the version of a man not skilled in the original language of the author; but then on the other side, first it is impossible to render all those little ornaments of speech in any two languages; and if he have a mastery in the sense and spirit of his author, and in his own language have a style and happiness of expression, he will easily supply all that is lost by that defect. A translator that would write with any force or spirit of an original, must never dwell on the words of his author. He ought to possess himself entirely, and perfectly comprehend the genius and sense of his author, the nature of the subject, and the terms of the art or subject treated of; and then he will express himself as justly, and with as The original copy, which I have already observed is very inaccurately printed, reads left. The conclusion content of the sentence shews that the author wrote lost. here, and A and much life, as if he wrote an original: whereas, he who copies word for word, loses all the spirit in the tedious transfusion. I would not be understood that he should be at liberty to give such a turn as Mr. Spence has in some of his; where for the fine raillery and Attick salt of Lucian, we find the gross expressions of Billingsgate, or Moorfields and Bartholomew Fair. For I write not to such translators, but to men capacious of the soul and genius of their authors, without which all their labour will be of no use but to disgrace themselves, and injure the author that falls into their slaughter-house. I believe I need give no other rules to the reader than the following version, where example will be stronger than precept, to which I now refer them; in which a man justly qualified for a translator will discover many rules extremely useful to that end. But [to] a man who wants these natural qualifications which are necessary for such an undertaking, all particular precepts are of no other use, than to make him a more remarkable coxcomb. DEDICATION OF THE PASTORALS OF VIRGIL., TO THE RIGHT HONOURABLE HUGH, LORD CLIFFORD, MY LORD, BARON OF CHUDLEIGH.' I HAVE found it not more difficult to translate Virgil, than to find such patrons as I desire for my translation; for though England is not wanting in a learned nobility, yet such are my 9 Our author's translation of Virgil, which was begun in 1694, and completed in about three years, was published in folio, by subscription, in 1697.-The several parts were dedicated to different noblemen; the Eclogues to Lord Clifford, the Georgicks to Lord Chesterfield, and the Æneid to the Marquis of Normanby, Of this nobleman, who was son of the Lord Treasurer Clifford, (see vol. i. p. 379,) no memorials have been transmitted to us. He died in 1730. 2 In a former Essay our author has spoken less respectfully of the English Nobility. See vol. ii. p. 35. . His present sentiment, however, was, I believe, well founded. |